However, while the education and training market is booming, there are also a lot of education and training contract disputes.
According to statistics, from 20 17 to 20 19, Haidian District Court of Beijing accepted 1329 cases of education and training contract disputes and concluded 1246 cases.
Among them, 20 17 accepted 375 cases and reviewed 3 1 1 cases. In 20 18, the number of cases accepted decreased by 4% to 360 compared with the same period of last year, and the review results increased by 25.08% to 389 compared with the same period of last year. In 20 19, the number of cases accepted increased by 65% to 594 compared with the same period of last year, and the review results increased by 40.36% to 546.
Generally speaking, the number of cases accepted and closed by Haidian District Court is on the rise.
Then, in the face of the trend of high disputes over consumer education and training contracts and many consumer traps, how to avoid "exploiting loopholes", the judges of Haidian District Court in Beijing gave a theoretical explanation through typical cases to help consumers effectively protect their rights.
Training institutions shall not change the contents of the contract without authorization.
2065438+July 2006, Zhai signed the IE-LAB Member Training Agreement with a training institution (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement) to attend the network information security training course provided by the training institution.
The agreement promises a training fee of 35,000 yuan; The main obligation of training institutions is to provide qualified professional teachers with teaching experience, professional learning places and experimental places, and the teaching form is "interview experiment".
After the agreement was signed, Zhai paid a training fee of 20,000 yuan.
During the training, the training institution changed the class time. For example, teachers don't attend classes according to the prescribed timetable, cancel classes and suspend classes for a long time.
For the above changes, some teachers did not explain the reasons, and some were not completely reasonable.
Moreover, educational institutions have changed their teaching methods and changed "online teaching" into "staged online teaching".
In the process of "online discussion" to solicit opinions, some students did not agree with this.
Post-training institutions require students to sign exemption clauses, indicating that if they do not sign, the course depth and online operation will be adjusted.
Zhai did not agree to sign the contract and thought that the behavior of the training institution was a serious breach of contract, requiring the training institution to refund the training fee in full and compensate for the losses.
The court held that the "Agreement" signed by Zhai and the training institution was the true intention of both parties, and the content did not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and it was legal and valid. Both parties shall fully perform their respective obligations according to the agreement.
Training institutions frequently adjust the class hours in training, and the reasons for the adjustment are often the personal reasons of the teaching teachers, because the students who change the teaching form without the consent of all the students have not signed the exemption clause.
The above-mentioned breach of contract by training institutions has seriously affected learners' learning and has constituted a failure to fulfill their main obligations.
Zhai' s reason for requesting the termination of the agreement is justified, and the training institution did not provide sufficient evidence for his effective class hours. The court upheld Zhai's claim for a full refund.
In the end, the court decided to terminate the agreement and the training institution returned a training fee of 20,000 yuan.
According to the fourth paragraph of Article 94 of the Contract Law, if one party delays the performance of debts or commits other breach of contract, the other party to the contract has the right to demand the termination of the contract.
In this case, the contract signed by Zhai and the training institution is valid, and the training institution should fully perform the training obligations according to the training content, training time and training method agreed in the contract, and cannot unilaterally change it.
Without the consent of the trainees, those who change the way of performing the main obligations of the contract without authorization and seriously violate the contract shall bear the liability for breach of contract.
The judge said that from the perspective of trial practice, training institutions usually change the original contract in the following ways. First of all, change directly, without giving any explanation to the students who are studying. Second, ignore the legal binding force of the contract, regard the consent of some learners as the opinions of all learners, and take the opinions of some learners as the basis for changing the training content and training methods. Third, unilaterally set obligations for students outside the contract. In this case, students are required to sign an "exemption agreement" separately, and if they don't sign it, the training content will be changed on this basis.
It is a breach of contract for the training institution to change the performance content agreed in the original contract in any of the above ways. If the trainees "can't achieve the purpose of the contract", can't get the necessary training content and can't achieve the expected training effect because of this breach of contract, etc., the trainees demand to cancel the contract, ask for a refund and compensate for the losses.
The judge reminded that in practice, training contracts are generally formal contracts, and the possibility of students adjusting the contents of the contracts is extremely low. When a consumer signs a contract, the judge must first fully understand the contents of the contract. Including training price, training institutions' commitment to training effect, actual training content, training methods, training teachers' qualifications, training places and so on. Secondly, when a training institution changes the content of its training obligations by itself, it should get in touch with the institution in time. For example, if communication is ineffective, changing the composition has a substantial impact on the rights of students, and the purpose of the contract cannot be achieved, the rights will be protected in time through litigation. Finally, after the contract comes into effect, the modification of the contract must be agreed by all parties through consultation, and students who disagree with the modification shall follow the original contract. If the original contract cannot be fulfilled due to the reasons of the training institution, the training institution shall bear different legal responsibilities according to different situations.
We must be vigilant when signing a guarantee contract.
On February 28th, 20 15, Wang signed a demotion agreement with a training institution, stipulating that Wang would pay the training fee of the judicial examination at one time, amounting to 6,543,803 yuan. If you can't pass the judicial examination that year, the training institution should refund all the tuition fees within three days after receiving Mr. Wang's application.
Mr. Wang paid 6.5438+0.3 million yuan, but the judicial review failed at that time. Training institutions refuse to refund for various reasons.
Wang appealed to the court and asked the training institution to refund 6.5438+0.3 million yuan.
The court held that the consultation between Wang and the training institution on the guaranteed class of judicial examination was the true intention of both parties and did not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and regulations. The law has legal effect, and both parties should abide by it.
In this case, the training institution promises that the trainees can't reach the learning goal and fully refund the training fee, which is accepted by the trainees. The two sides signed a corresponding contract for this purpose, and the corresponding terms were clearly stipulated in the contract.
If the refund conditions agreed in the contract are met, the training institution shall perform the refund obligation in accordance with the contract.
If the training institution fails to fulfill the obligation of refund, its behavior has been in breach of contract, and the trainees have the right to fulfill the corresponding obligations to the training institution in accordance with the contract.
In the later period, Wang's request for refund was in line with the contract and had corresponding legal basis.
In the end, the court ruled that the training institution refunded the training fee in full.
In fact, the sales strategy of "guaranteed bottom" and "total withdrawal" aggravates the contractual obligations of training institutions, and at the same time, training institutions can attract more students in a short time and increase the profits of enterprises quickly.
The educational institutions that make this commitment have strong teachers' ability, perfect teaching system, rich teaching experience and strong financial support. They are either confident about the training effect or lack of strength. If we only take "guarantee" as the gimmick of enrollment propaganda, we can't put the quality of the course and
Therefore, when choosing such courses, we should be cautious and pay attention to the following questions.
First, before signing an education and training contract containing this clause, students should fully investigate and understand the credit status, business credit and training ability of the training institution, so as to avoid the difficulties in subsequent rights protection caused by rashly signing the contract.
At the same time, strictly review whether the refund conditions and cycle agreed in the contract are consistent with the enrollment promotion and oral commitment, so as to avoid the situation that the oral commitment is not implemented in writing.
Second, there is a risk that the training of the "guaranteed" class will not achieve the training effect. The only way to pass the exam is to work hard by yourself. No matter what external help is used, it can only play an auxiliary role. Consumers are uneasy about the promise of "guarantee" because they have paid a high training fee. Even if the training institutions finally refund the tuition fees as promised, the time and opportunity cost required for the examination can not be compensated by money.
Third, when signing such education and training contracts, consumers should focus on examining whether the refund clause in the contract is accompanied by specific conditions and whether the agreed conditions are clear. Educational institutions can't rashly sign contracts just on the basis of the agreed slogans of "guaranteed bottom" and "full refund".
For example, some insurance contracts stipulate that "if you fail to pass the exam for reasons other than training institutions, you will not be refunded", but the expression of "reasons other than training institutions" is rather vague, so consumers should pay attention to understanding when signing the contract so as not to affect rights protection.
Special attention should be paid to the transfer clause in the contract.
2016165438+123 October, Zhou signed a course sales agreement with company a, stipulating that company a would provide 96 hours of dance training courses for Zhou's daughter. The total amount is 17450 yuan, and the class place is a building in Huitong Road, Haidian District, which is non-transferable.
Zhou paid all the contract money.
On July, 2065438+2007 1 day, Company A signed the Agreement on Packaging and Transferring Art+ International Educational Institutions with Company B outside the incident, stipulating that Company A would package and transfer its educational base, school district facilities and all registered student resources to Company B ... Company B promised to receive enrolled students before July, 2065438+2007, and undertake the unfinished educational work of students.
On July 20th, 20 17, a teacher from Company B posted relevant package discount information on WeChat circle of friends.
From 20 17 to 12, due to the closure of the above-mentioned training venue, Zhou could not continue training.
After that, Company A posted "Notice on Students' Resumption of Classes" in its own name at the training venue to deal with the aftermath.
On February 4th, 20 18, Company A authorized the guardian organized by Yao to hold a meeting to show the guardian the Package Transfer Agreement of Art+ International Educational Institutions reached with Company B to inform the guardian of the transfer.
Accordingly, Zhou did not agree to change the subject of the contract to Company B, nor did he agree to arrange for Company A to complete the education in other places. Company A's behavior of continuing to perform the main obligations of the Course Sales Agreement is a fundamental breach of contract, and the agreement is terminated and the remaining tuition fee is returned 13087 yuan.
The court held that a company and Zhou established a contractual relationship according to law, and both parties should perform it according to the contract.
A company claims that it has transferred the contract to B company, and Zhou actually formed a new agreement with B company, and the contract between the two parties was terminated, but its claim is obviously unfounded.
First of all, both parties expressly agree that this agreement shall not be transferred, but they do not agree to the transfer of the agreement this week; Secondly, after consulting with Company B, Company A did not explicitly inform Mr. Zhou. In addition, during the performance of the contract, the teaching place, training teachers and brands have not changed. Mr. Zhou has reason to believe that the main body of contract performance has always been Company A. Finally, after the class venue was closed, Company A posted the Notice on Students' Resumption of Classes in its own name to deal with the aftermath.
It can be seen that the contract between Zhou and Company A has not changed. Company A advocates that Zhou and Company B form a new agreement, and the basis is insufficient. Company A must continue to perform the contract and provide services as promised.
At present, the classroom involved has been closed, so Company A can't continue to perform the contract here, while Zhou refuses to perform the contract elsewhere, so the contract between the two parties can't continue to perform. Zhou has the right to demand the termination of the contract between the two parties and the refund of the remaining tuition fees from Company A..
Finally, the court ruled that Zhou terminated the course sales agreement signed with Company A, and Company A returned Zhou 13087 yuan.
With the advent of the era of knowledge economy, adult education and early education courses are becoming more and more popular. Consumers should pay attention to the following issues while improving themselves and broadening their horizons.
First, multi-party inspection, carefully selected training institutions.
At present, the level of various training institutions is uneven. In order to avoid the substantial impact on the performance of the contract due to major changes in the operating conditions of the institution itself, it is suggested that before choosing a training institution, we should learn about the training institution through various channels such as business administration website, credit information system, referee document network or field trip as much as possible, and carefully select the contracting subject.
Second, strengthen legal awareness, and pay special attention to the clauses related to the transfer of rights and obligations in the contract.
According to Article 79 of the Contract Law, the creditor may assign all or part of the rights of the contract to a third party. Except in any of the following circumstances: (1) It may not be transferred according to the nature of the contract. (two) according to the agreement of the parties shall not be transferred; (3) It shall not be transferred according to law.
Article 84 stipulates that if the debtor assigns all or part of its contractual obligations to a third party, it shall obtain the consent of the creditor.
Article 88 stipulates that with the consent of the other party, one party may assign its rights and obligations in the contract to a third party.
In accordance with the above-mentioned laws, if the rights and obligations stipulated in the contract are not transferable, all parties shall abide by the agreement and shall not transfer the obligations without authorization. Otherwise, it will default.
In this case, if the service provider transfers the rights and obligations without authorization, resulting in the inability to perform the contractual obligations as originally agreed, the other party to the contract may claim that the service provider constitutes a fundamental breach of contract and demand the termination of the contract and the return of the remaining tuition fees.
Third, we should pay attention to the collection and preservation of evidence to avoid "no evidence to check" after disputes.
The parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their claims.
Therefore, in the process of signing and performing education and training contracts, students and parents should have the awareness of evidence collection and custody, keep important documents such as contracts, payment vouchers and change agreements, do a good job of checking the class hours with education and training institutions, pay attention to whether there are changes in the subjects who perform training obligations, and inform them in time if there are any changes.
If you have any questions about the self-taught/successful examination, don't know the contents of the test sites and the local policies of the self-taught/successful examination, click on Mr. official website at the bottom to get the review materials for free: /xl/